1) https://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch4en/conc4en/portdev.

html

The Evolution of a Port (The Anyport Model)Anyport is a model developed by Bird

(1963) describing how port infrastructures evolve in time and space. Based on his
research into the evolution of British ports, Bird proposed a five stage model to
demonstrate how facilities in a typical port develop. Starting from the initial port site with
small lateral quays adjacent to the town center, the elaboration of wharfs is the product of
evolving maritime technologies and improvements in cargo handling. This is also marked
by changing spatial relationships between the port and the urban core, as docks are built
further away from the central business district. In the final stages, increased specialization
of cargo handling, growing sizes of ships, and ever increasing demands for space for
cargo-handling and storage results in port activity being concentrated at sites far removed
from the oldest facilities. Port infrastructures are thus constructed over several decades
and in some case over several centuries. Three major steps can be identified in the port
development process identified by Anyport:

Setting. The initial setting of a port is strongly dependent on geographical

considerations. On the above example, the setting is related to the furthest
point of inland navigation by sailships. A standard evolution of a port starts
from the original port, most of the time a fishing port with trading and
shipbuilding activities, which includes several quays (1). For many centuries
until the industrial revolution, ports remained rather rudimentary in terms of
their terminal facilities. Port-related activities were mainly focused on
warehousing and wholesaling, located on sites directly adjacent to the port.
The port district was a key element of urban centrality.
Expansion. The industrial revolution triggered several changes that impacted
on port activities. Quays were expanded and jetties were constructed to
handle the growing amounts of freight and passengers as well as larger ships

(2). As the size of ships expanded, shipbuilding became an activity that

required the construction of docks (3). Further, the integration of rail lines
with port terminals enabled access to vast hinterlands with a proportional
growth in maritime traffic. Port-related activities also expanded to include
industrial activities. This expansion mainly occurred downstream towards
deeper draft areas.
Specialization. The next phase involved the construction of specialized piers to
handle freight such as containers, ores, grain, petroleum and coal (4), which
expanded warehousing needs significantly. Larger high-capacity ships often
required dredging or the construction of long jetties granting access to greater
depths. This evolution implied for several ports a migration of their activities
away from their original setting and an increase of their handling capacities. In
turn, original port sites, commonly located adjacent to downtown areas,
became obsolete and were abandoned. Numerous reconversion opportunities
of port facilities to other uses (waterfront parks, housing and commercial
developments) were created (5).

Bird (1971) suggested that Anyport was intended not to display a pattern into which all ports
must be forced, but to provide a base with which to compare the development of actual ports.
The model has been tested in a variety of different conditions (Hoyle, 1967). While local
conditions do produce differences in detail, there are sufficient similarities to make
the Anyportconcept a useful description of port morphological development. The emergence of
new container terminals continues the trend towards specialization and the search for sites
adjacent to deeper water.One of the features that Anyport brings out is the changing relation
between ports and their host cities. The model describes the growing repulsion by the rest of the
urban milieu. This aspect has been worked upon by a number of geographers investigating the
redevelopment of harbor land and the involved linkages. One of these urban linkages is the
redevelopment of old port sites for other urban uses, such as Docklands in London and
Harborfront in Baltimore. A more recent amendment to the Anyport model is focusing on
container terminal development. Five alternatives are presented:

Closure, where the facility is abandoned because of poor site /and or operating
conditions (the terminal has lost its market relevance);
Expansion, where operating conditions require the existing sites to be extended or
modified. This mostly involve yard areas and the lengthening of berths;
Addition, where because of demands of deeper water or operating facilities, new berths
are established;
Consolidation, where several existing berths are combined to provide new expanded
facilities;
Redevelopment, seen as the outcome of functional assessment of existing facilities and
the establishment of a super terminal.

The Anyport model was further challenged by developments brought by containerization, which
incited the development of a network of satellite terminals and inland load centers connected to
the port terminal facilities. The process is often labeled asport regionalization.
1) VISAKHAPATNAM, SEPT 20:
Poor rail and road connectivity with hinterland is one of the main reasons why many Indian ports are
unable to realise their full potential and urgent steps to address this shortcoming need to be taken,
says D.K. Mohanty, Chairman and Managing Director of Dredging Corporation of India (DCI).
He was speaking here on Friday at the East Coast Maritime Business Summit organised by Maritime
Gateway, a Hyderabad-based magazine. The summit concluded on Friday.
Mohanty cited the examples of Paradip and Ennore ports and explained how poor connectivity had
cost the two dearly. Paradip port, which celebrated its golden jubilee recently, could achieve only 50
million tonnes in 50 years, even that only because of the active support from former Odisha Chief
Minister Biju Patnaik in its initial phases. But the port suffered badly since then because of its poor
connectivity with the hinterland, he said.
Mohanty said that nowadays no port can claim its own exclusive hinterland, as many non-major
and private ports have come up.
The monopoly of major public sector ports has been broken. This is desirable, as port users will get
better service. They will go to the cheapest, most user-friendly port. He also elaborated on the
various projects taken up by the DCI across the country.
VIZAG LOGISTICS PARK

V. Kalyana Rama, the Executive Director of Container Corporation of India (Concor), said the
company is developing an integrated logistics park in Visakhapatnam on 100 acres of land taken on
lease from the Visakhapatnam port trust. Work on ten acres is complete and the terminal will
become operational by December. In the second phase, we will develop the remaining area and the
logistics park will be ready in three years or so, he said.
K. Shankar, President of Shipping, India Cements, Tamal Roy, Vice-President of TM International
Logistics, and Jatin Sarkar, General Manager of infrastructure firm RITES commented on the gross
neglect of coastal shipping and inland waterways in India. They said that better water connectivity
could have reduced the burden on the rail and road networks in linking ports with the hinterland. S.
Kishore, Development Commissioner of the Visakhapatnam Special Economic Zone, spoke about the
role of SEZs and their relation to the development of the maritime sector.
1) Infrastructure Today | Saturday, November 22, 2014

Port connectivity: The efficiency linkages

Bankers say ports are one of the best sectors to finance to. With the frenetic growth envisaged in
the 2020 Agenda, port connectivity is impatiently awaited as the government works on fourlane roads and rail lines linking the gateways to the hinterland. Ports' efficiency, viability, business
and trade depend on how well connected the port is, but Indian ports are either situated in crowded
cities or too remote to be connected. Charu Bahri writes.
Ships spend a fifth of their time at ports on average, their own efficiency impacted by port
productivity. Although ports cannot exist nor function in isolation, approach to a port from the
hinterland can be critical enough to spell doom or drive the success of the port because it determines
turnaround and evacuation time-vital to the functioning of a port. Narrow approach roads to ports,
for instance, delay the entry and feeding of export cargo and the evacuation of import cargo. In the
larger context, inefficiencies amounting from poor connectivity hinder the growth of external trade
and economic progress.
Connecting infrastructure is the means to approach the port site through land, and therefore, is as
important as the port itself. Connectivity defines how rapidly cargo can be evacuated from the port
and hence, has an impact on the ports throughout. "Both rail lines and expressways are lifelines for a
port, and equally important for its success," emphasises Capt JB Rohilla, Chief Port Officer &
Hydrographer, Maharashtra Maritime Board (MMB).
In spite of awareness of the role of connectivity infrastructure, business has suffered as a result of
over saturated road and rail linkages, and insufficient mechanisation. Indian major ports lag behind
leading transhipment hubs in the region, Dubai and Singapore. The Indian ports and shipping
sector: Breaking boundaries, tapping potential, a paper by FICCI and Ernst & Young reports that
container throughput at major Indian ports (combined) is 6.8 million twenty-foot equivalent units
(TEUs), substantially less than Singapore's 25.9 million TEUs (in CY09) and Dubai's 11.1 million
TEUs (in CY09).
Pro-linkage Policy
With a view to enhancing port connectivity and boost the performance of Indian ports, the
government's Maritime Agenda 2020 defines the minimum required connectivity to the major ports
as four-lane approach roads and double line rail connectivity. The central outlay for road and rail
connectivity for the 13 major ports is an ambitious Rs 7,912 crore. Of this, Rs 4,675 crore is being
spent in the period 2010-12 while Rs 2,511 crore has been earmarked for the 12th Five Year Plan
period (2012-17). Maritime Boards in coastline states would help execute these policies and
coordinate the development of private sector intermediate and minor ports. Separate budgets are
being drawn up by states to connect the non-major (intermediate and minor) ports they own.
"Port connectivity is high on our agenda," says Rohilla. MMB aims at facilitating the development of
allied connectivity infrastructure by private port developers by resolving the foremost challenges.
The process of obtaining approvals for rail and road linkages from state / central government and
agencies such as the Railways is just of the many functions it performs.
Private initiatives
Private port developers-operators see connectivity as the key that holds the potential to turnaround
their fortunes, and have been taking up connectivity projects in earnest, even if laying roads leading
to the port falls outside the scope of the port project and laying rail lines and creating rail sidings
means incurring extra costs as well as having to negotiate revenue-sharing arrangements with
Railways. Rajeeva Sinha, Director, Mundra Port and SEZ Limited, describes the association
saying, "Investing in developing a port without paying attention to the connecting road and rail
infrastructure is to kill a port for a small reason."

Ports with connectivity in place will be ports of preference, and private players have taken the lead.
Dhamra Port Company is laying a 62 km rail link from Dhamra to Bhadrak on the main HowrahChennai line to transport cargo to and from the port. Gangavaram Port has its independent railway
siding. Pipavav is well located adjacent to the NH 8E. The port has built an 11 km highway to connect
to it as well as formed a JV with the Indian Railways-the Pipavav Rail Corporation Ltd-which has
built a 271 km rail link to the main grid at Surendranagar. Pipavav port authorities remain in
constant touch with Container Corporation of India (Concor) to enhance the frequency of trains to
help speedy evacuation of containers and bulk cargo from the port. But congestion is an issue after
the link joins the main rail network. The clear solution, Prakash Tulsiani, Managing Director,
APM Terminals Pipavav, says, is lines devoted to freight. "The Dedicated Freight Corridor which
is long pending should be completed immediately and many other such corridors should be
developed throughout the country."
But the Railways is also beleaguered with rakes and container availability issues. PV
Chandramohan, President-Technical, Navayuga Engineering, says, "The liberalisation of
cargo rail traffic would help improve the turnover and efficiency of ports. Connectivity would
improve if Concor were to be privatised."
Competing on Connectivity
Connectivity has long been a deciding factor for port users since it directly impacts bottomlines. "By
ensuring faster evacuation of the cargo from the port, good port connectivity reduces the overall
logistics cost of the customer and ensures faster delivery of cargo to the customers increasing the
profitability of their businesses, in the process capacity of the port also increases," observes Rajiv
Agarwal, Managing Director, Essar Ports. "Transportation cost forms a major part of the
overall cost of cargo. Reducing cargo transporting cost has a great impact on the cost of
commodities, improving economies and standard of living of the people," observes P Mara
Pandian, Chairman, Mormugao Port Trust.
Take the country's largest container terminal, JNPT, as an example. More than half of the country's
container traffic is routed through JNPT; most of these containers come from West Uttar
Pradesh/NCR region. Importers' and exporters' preference for this port is explained by the port's
seamless hinterland connectivity and shippers' inclination for the port, which in turn is reason for
the high frequency of ships calling at the port. Better linkages between private sector ports, especially
those competing with JNPT, have already impacted business at JNPT and other ports as Mundra, the
fourth largest commercial port, is only "marginally lower than JNPT" as Gautam Adani,
Chairman, Mundra Port and SEZ recently mentioned at the half-year results of his port.
The direct impact of improved connectivity of private non-major ports on the major ports depends
on three factors, according to Sushi Shyamal, Partner, Ernst & Young, "If the hinterlands of
the ports overlap, they would compete in the long run. Also, major ports that do not invest in
upgrading infrastructure and de-congesting traffic would lose out in the long term. Lastly, the risk of
traffic of large shipping lines managing terminals at major ports-DP World manages the Nhava
Sheva International Container Terminal, and APM manages Gateway Terminal-going to
neighbouring ports is low as long as they hold on to such operations."
"There is enough cargo to go around," says Captain Rohilla. He attributes this to high demand
projections and figures that show that the existing capacity still falls short of the rising trajectory
demand is expected to take.
Development models
Increasing port development activity has brought more players into the sector. Now that port
connectivity projects are coming under the spotlight, is there scope for these to be modelled on the

PPP format rather than contract? Could road and rail connectivity projects awarded with private
partnership in the equity be made viable?
According to Sinha, "Since new ports are being developed on the PPP model, there should be no
problem in developing road and rail projects also on the PPP model. Rail and road connectivity to
the nearest rail line and highway respectively, is integral for the success of a port. But such
development must be roped in with the development of the port and thus driven by the port
operator. A port operator would ensure that the fee structure is aligned with the purpose of
developing the port whereas a third party would simply be interested in recovering charges as soon
as possible. Connectivity projects are sometimes seen as risky - if you think of it, the viability of road
and rail links connecting a port comes from the port operations. Only a port operator with a vested
interest in the success of the port would ensure the connecting infrastructure is available for
reasonable charges. Road and rail connectivity offered at reasonable charges is one reason for
Mundra Port's success. Compartmentalising port and its supporting connectivity infrastructure is
akin to creating fertile ground for disputes."
Agarwal's opinion is, "Port connectivity projects should be taken by government agencies as they will
benefit from the increased scale of operation in terms of higher traffic through rail and road network
on commissioning of these facilities. However, if a port has high traffic potential, the connectivity
project may be viable on its own as it will increase the capacity utilisation at the port and higher
traffic will flow through the connecting rail or road network. In such scenarios, the PPP model would
work."
While the PPP model has its takers, naysayers exist as well. "The PPP model is unsuitable for port
connectivity projects," opines Dr Chandramohan. "Road and rail connections are a part of the overall
services offered by a port and hence must be charged for as a package. Users would face a nightmare
if they had to negotiate separate windows run by toll road and railway operators. In the interest of
efficiency, usage fees for essential connectivity services should be added in the cargo charges."
Contending that PPP projects are at the mercy of private contractors who often keep lingering project
completion, MK Ajayakumar, GM, Afcons Infrastructure, affirms, "Port connectivity projects should
be modelled as contracts rather than as PPP projects, because speedy completion of projects which is
not possible on PPP."
Development challenges
Earlier this year, Afcons Infrastructure made headlines for successfully constructing the
Vallarpadam railway link in Kochi for Rail Vikas Nigam. At 4.62 km, the rail bridge is the longest in
India built at a cost of Rs 3.5 billion, funded by the Central Government through the Ministry of
Shipping. The Vallarpadam railway link is part of an 8.86 km rail corridor connecting the
International Container Transhipment Terminal (ICTT) on Vallarpadam Island with Kochi city, and
is being exclusively used for goods container traffic to and from ICTT. Ajayakumar says, "Land
acquisition is the major challenge faced in port connectivity projects." The Vallapardam rail link
project faced initial delays because of land acquisitions too. In all, 12.5 ha of land belonging to the
government, the Cochin Port Trust and Indian Railways was acquired for the railway line.
"Land acquisition and dealing with regulatory agencies are the two biggest challenges faced in executing port PPP projects. Financing is much easier to organise," adds Sinha. To cite an example of
the extent land acquisition can delay port connectivity projects - Mormugao Port is well connected
with the rest of the country by two national highways NH-17 and NH-4A. But the existing road
connecting the port (NH-17) passes through the city of Vasco da Gama, where heavy congestion has
caused significant restrictions on the movement of trucks and trailers. While work on a new four lane
bypass road, 18.3 km long, commenced in 2001, only 13.1 km of this road has been completed and
opened as yet. "The last stretch of 5.2 km is still incomplete because the Government of Goa has to

still hand over some land. This project is required to be taken on priority basis," adds Pandian.
Shortages of land plague brownfield developments at major ports too, necessitating port connectivity
projects to overcome these challenges. The Chennai Port Trust, for instance, is setting up a dry port
and multimodal logistics hub on a BOT basis, on 125 acre of land near the Sriperumbudur SEZ,
about 40 km away from the port. Key to this development is the Rs 600 crore Chennai-Ennore road
and the Rs 1,655 crore elevated four-lane corridor to Maduravoyal. Connectivity projects thus
become priority projects.
Inland waterways: Scope for expansion
Globally, shipping lines select ports offering better logistics. The Port of Rotterdam is favoured for its
seamless intermodal connectivity by rail and road as well as an excellent inland water network that
moves most of the bulk and container cargo. Closer home, there is plenty of scope to improve upon
the country's 14,500 km long navigable inland waterways. Of this, 5,200 km is attributed to major
rivers and 500 km to canals suitable for mechanised crafts. Inland waterway transport (IWT)
handles only around one per cent of total inland cargo transport, typically carrying iron ore and
fertilizers etc. But there is tremendous scope
to expand usage of this environment-friendly and low cost medium.
Inland waterways are most effective when the start and end points are the source and place of
consumption of the material respectively. So, IWT projects tend to be seen as less lucrative than rail
and road connectivity. But IWT projects demand lower investments - both for creation and
maintenance. Developing 1 km of highway costs the same as developing 100 km of waterways. IWT
may acquire more takers as other modes of transport become more expensive in the face of rising
fuel costs. Investments worth Rs 30,710 crore are proposed for the development of IWT projects in
the coming decade.
Technology: Enhancing efficiency of connectivity
Wide approach roads to a port are not enough to ensure the steady flow of cargo. Incoming
transportation vehicles must be swiftly cleared and given directions as well. In 1997, a decision was
taken to privatise Singapore Port, which considerably improved available infrastructure, its
utilisation and operational efficiency. An initiative introduced at the time was a fully automated and
paperless Flow-Through Gate system, which makes use of passes issued by the port authorities to
identify and clear trucks for entry and gives drivers instructions regarding the exact position in the
yard where the container will be stacked within 25 second. The system is highly efficient, handling an
average traffic flow of 700 trucks per peak hour and 8,000 trucks per day. The Flow-Through Gate
System received an Innovation Award at the 11th UK Seatrade Awards held in 1999 for its
contribution to the port's excellence. Today, Singapore Port handles 30 million TEUs of containers,
which represents around one-fifth of the world's total container shipment throughput.
Not in the pipeline?
Most Indian ports boast of one or two kinds of linkages-typically road and rail-with the hinterlands
depending on the use they are put to; inland waterways and pipeline linkages are few. Kandla is well
connected by rail, road and pipeline, but lacks an inland waterway connection. Mormugao in
contrast has excellent inland waterway connectivity thanks to the Mandovi and Zuari rivers but does
not connect with a heavy duty expressway or a major rail head. The country's busiest container cargo
terminals at JNPT are well connected by rail and road but lack pipeline and inland waterway
connectivity. PV Chandramohan, President-Technical, Navayuga Engineering
Company, observes that JNPT does not need a pipeline or inland waterway linkage since it doesn't
handle bulk liquid or solid cargo. Inland waterways are not developed in the hinterland. Besides,
container traffic does not recognise hinterland especially with long haul rail connections. Haldia

dock stands out for boasting of all four connections. But because of the large tidal variation and the
currents in river Hooghly, the berths are located inside an impounded dock. Draughts are low
outside the dock. These factors mar the efficiency of the dock.
Major ports located in busy metros can't develop new connections like pipelines and an inland
waterway. Interestingly, cities often develop around ports to support the activity. But some years
down the line, the city becomes a hindrance to further development of the port.